EAAAirVenture OshkoshShopJoin
1  2  Next Page >

Wind turbines on final

Posted By:
Rick Rademacher
Vintage Aircraft Association MemberYoung Eagles Pilot or VolunteerAirVenture Volunteer
71
Posts
20
#1 Posted: 9/14/2009 19:34:09

 

Having spent the last weekend at a very successful MERFI flyin at Grimes Field in Urbana, you would think that I would be a very happy pilot. As a local trustee of MERFI, I am pleased with MERFI but very concerned about events out of my control that might have a very negative impact on the future flying into Grimes Field in Urbana, Ohio. For you see, Buckeye Wind plans on building a 70-turbine facility on privately-leased sites scattered over 9,000 acres in Champaign County.

 

Last week, the FAA issued notices of presumed hazard for 38 of the proposed wind turbine locations with at least 22 notices being “determined” actions. At least 16 of the 492 feet in height turbines will be within 2.4 to 3.3 nautical miles east of the Grimes Field (I74) reference point.

 

Not only am I concerned about this situation for Grimes pilots but what if wind turbines are then built this close in at your airport because of the precedence set at Grimes. Can this happen? I hope not.

 

How close should 492 foot winds turbines be located from an airport? I would hope that the State of Ohio would look at this situation and do the right thing!

 

What do you think?

 



Doc Cottingham
3
Posts
0
#2 Posted: 9/17/2009 20:24:44

Rick,

 

I flew into MERFI to good old Grimes (based there in the mid 70's) and I would hate to see them that close to Wendell Weller's strip.  I am close to an area where there are plans for up to 3000 of them across 30-40 miles.  I don't think there is any regard for plans near airports.  Some are within 3 miles of Kentland, IN (50I).  I suppose they are not any worse than cell towers, which just got put near my approach path for my airstrip (1IN6).  I'm afraid once the lease has been written with the landowner, it will be difficult to get the state involved.

Good Luck.

Doc Cottingham



Bruce Liddel
3
Posts
2
#3 Posted: 9/20/2009 07:12:43 Modified: 9/20/2009 07:18:34

I can't cite a specific FAR, but there is a federal guideline for how high a structure can be within 5 miles of an airport.  It is something like 1 foot high for every 100 feet away from the center point of the runway.  This would be a 1 % slope, and I presume it is for protection of IFR approach to minimums.   Anyway, the rules exist for a reason, and we cannot allow anyone to habitually violate them. 

A typical cell tower is no more than 200 feet tall.  Slamming into a 492 foot wind turbine with your aircraft could ruin your whole day.  I cannot imagine that the tips will be lit, but at night they represent an incredible hazard to air navigation.  Even with the blades illuminated, I imagine they would represent a visual distraction similar to rapidly flashing strobe lights. 

It's one thing to callously kill off endangered species of raptors who are unable to see and avoid the blades.  It is yet another to be picking pieces of airplanes and people out of the wind turbine blades on a regular basis.  I imagine a collision with a large enough aircraft might also damage the turbine's blades to the point where they might separate from the hub, and I wouldn't even want to be on the ground when that happened!

Airports get windy, and that makes them a target for wind turbines.  I'm not insensitive to the theoretical attraction of clean cheap electric, but wind turbines cannot be allowed to coexist in the 5 mile vicinity of an airport.  A 492 foot wind turbine should be at least 5 miles away from any airport runway.

 



Rick Rademacher
Vintage Aircraft Association MemberYoung Eagles Pilot or VolunteerAirVenture Volunteer
71
Posts
20
#4 Posted: 9/20/2009 08:36:19

 

I am very familiar with the Weller grass strip as I was a partner with Wendell for 26 years in a 1959 Cessna 182 that we kept at his strip. From the look of things to come, flying low in Ohio may not be an option and many grass strips will quickly disappear.

Being far from control zones, Dayton and Columbus, with rolling hills and many smooth open fields, I have always enjoyed the safety of the area to be able to fly low and slow in ultralights, Pietenpols, Cubs, and other slow aircraft.  A few cell towers at 100 feet are to be avoided but nothing much else up high.

Now, with the proposed wind turbines at a height of 492 feet scattered over the area, my days of flying at 500 or less over the countryside may be numbered. And I suppose we can’t stop progress.

It will be too bad that most of the grass strips in Ohio will be so near 492 obstacles that most will have to close because of safety concerns. Two wind turbines will be within 1.2 miles of Wellers grass strip.

I would hope the FAA and we pilots are able to stop the placement of wind turbines near airports such as Grimes. The smaller grass strip will be harder to save. Maybe a hundred years from now when the wind turbines are torn down, pilots may again enjoy the freedom of flying low and slow.

See map of wind turbine placement near Grimes Field

 



Files Attachment(s):
map 1.JPG (281310 bytes)
James Zapref
Homebuilder or Craftsman
1
Post
1
#5 Posted: 9/20/2009 22:07:54

FYI

I would recommend that everyone go to OEAAA.FAA.GOV and register to receive emails when somebody/company/organization submits a FAA form to build a structure near  your airport. This web site explains alot about the criteria that the FAA uses to determine if an obstruction is a Hazard to aviation.

When you register, you will get emails on all proposals in the state you select, so most of them you can ignore, but there is a time limit to submitting comments.

I hope that helps.

 

 



Rick Rademacher
Vintage Aircraft Association MemberYoung Eagles Pilot or VolunteerAirVenture Volunteer
71
Posts
20
#6 Posted: 9/28/2009 09:42:56

 

So what does this mean for Grimes Field? The following quotes are taken from the Urbana Daily Citizen:

 

“In notices of determination issued earlier this month, the Federal Aviation Administration issued notices of presumed hazard for 38 proposed turbine locations near Grimes Field on the north side of Urbana. An FAA spokesman said that most of the notices were for sites between two to five miles from the airport, but said the FAA most likely won’t become involved as an intervenor to the OPSB application process.

 

Doug Crabill, assistant to Urbana’s director of administration, said that the information from the FAA has been turned over to the city’s airport consultant for further review, but the city has not taken action to become involved as an intervenor, even though the project could negatively impact airport operations based on the FAA data.”

 

“If OPSB grants “intervenor” status to the townships, their legal representation will be allowed to present information and testimony during an adjudicatory meeting in Columbus before the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio which will be held Oct.27”

 

“If the OPSB approves the application before the end of the year, construction of the turbines is slated to begin sometime in 2010”

 

So what is a pilot to do?

 



Rick Rademacher
Vintage Aircraft Association MemberYoung Eagles Pilot or VolunteerAirVenture Volunteer
71
Posts
20
#7 Posted: 10/2/2009 17:11:26

 

 

Buckeye Wind Farm Summary

On April 27, 2009, the Office of Aviation received approximately 70 wind turbine applications for the Buckeye Wind LLC wind turbine project from the FAA. Normally applications for a permit are sent to this office for review from the proponent. It is a Federal law to file with the FAA if certain criteria are exceeded. This information is forwarded to the State from the FAA.

After review, 10 sites exceeded State and FAA standards and were denied a permit under ORC 4561.31(A) (1). These structures effect the aircraft operations at 2 public-use airports. The 2 airports were Urbana Grimes (I74) and Urbana Weller (38I). Notification of permit denial was sent by e-mail to the proponent and to the proponents’ representative. The remaining 60 sites did not require a permit from the State and the proponent was also notified of this as well as future filing guidelines. (see below) Of the 60 sites, approximately 38 exceeded FAA standards and are “Presumed to be a Hazard”. These 38 drastically effect instrument approach criteria at the Urbana Grimes Airport.

On August 20th a meeting was held with this office and representatives of the Power Siting Board of the PUCO. This meeting was to review the Buckeye Wind farm application for certificate from the Power Siting Board. Under ORC 4906.10 an application and permit is not needed from the Office of Aviation provided the applicant meets the standards outlined in ORC 4561.32. It was recommended to the Power Siting Board representatives that they should adhere to the recommendations from the FAA and this office.

One would think that the Ohio Power Siting Board would surely follow the recommendations of the FAA and The Ohio Aviation Dept. However, our Governor wants alternative energy and the turbine group has $500 million to spend on this project. And, the local farmers want to lease a small area of land for big bucks! The OPSB has the final say.

 

So, I am asking you to send the following to the OPSB.

 

As a pilot, I have grave misgivings about the planned placement of over 30 492-foot wind turbines from 2 to four miles east of Grimes Field Urbana, Ohio. Whether flying IFR or VFR, wind turbines located that close to Grimes field would present a safety issue for my flight in and out of Grimes. I firmly believe that wind turbines should strictly adhere to the FAA guidelines as per title 14 CFR part 77, objects affecting navigable airspace. All wind turbines that have been issued an FAA Determination of Hazard should not be built.

 

Name                                                      N-number           Zip           State          Date        

 

Please feel free to make any changes to the above to better express your thoughts!

Go to this link http://www.opsb.ohio.gov/OPSB/contact.cfm and then copy and paste.

 

Make copies- sent to other pilots. Maybe we can make a difference.

 

Thanks for you help.

 

 

 

 

 



Rick Rademacher
Vintage Aircraft Association MemberYoung Eagles Pilot or VolunteerAirVenture Volunteer
71
Posts
20
#8 Posted: 10/8/2009 19:48:50

 

In the Urbana Citizen this Thursday  Headline  - City Council to hold emergency meeting Friday

 

“Mayor Ruth Zerkle scheduled an emergency meeting of the Urbana City Council for 11:a.m. Friday after the Airport Growth Advisory Board contacted city officials Wednesday about the approaching deadline for parties to file for the right to be heard on the wind turbine issue. The deadline is Friday afternoon.

……. The memo states this wind turbine project is the first in Ohio, possibly the nation, to impact airports and so may set precedents ............”

 

Also in the paper this Thursday was my letter to the editor:

 

  

To express the magnitude of the problem pilots would face having 30 plus 492 ft wind turbines located from 2-4 miles from Grimes Field, think of flying close to or over a large city in Ohio. And remember, the flight would take place at low altitude trying to land or depart in bad weather, low visibility or maybe at night.

Dayton has no buildings that are as tall as the proposed wind turbines. Cincinnati has one building that is 78 feet taller and one building that is about the same height. Now, Columbus does have five buildings that are taller with three of those only by 38 feet or less. The average height of the ten tallest buildings in Columbus is 498 feet, 13 feet more than One Nationwide Plaza. So, let’s use these 10 in Columbus as an example.

Now, picture 3 times that number of tall (40-story) structures within 2-4 miles of Grimes Field. The FAA and the Ohio Dept of Aviation have stated that a problem exists. Every pilot that I have talked with (over 50 signatures on a petition) thinks that the placement of the wind turbines so close to Grimes is a bad idea.

What was Buckeye Winds LLC thinking about in planning to put tall turbines so close to Grimes airport? They surely must have known about the rules, regulations and the safety situation for pilots. Are they, as Bill Cosby would say, just brain dead, plain incompetent or uncaring? My confidence in their good judgment has gone down a notch or two.

I wanted to stay clear of the wind turbine debate. However, my love of aviation demands that I speak up and try to preserve the airspace around Grimes for the safety of future aviators!

*********

Sent an e-mail to all Ohio Eaa chapters asking for more signatures! And more are on the way.

 

 

 



Rick Rademacher
Vintage Aircraft Association MemberYoung Eagles Pilot or VolunteerAirVenture Volunteer
71
Posts
20
#9 Posted: 10/12/2009 07:20:18

 

The Urbana City Council voted on Friday to become an intervener and present pilots concerns about having 492ft wind turbines from 2 to 4 miles from Grimes Field.

A.O.P.A. is also helping to support this effort. However, they are not doing as much as we had hoped. They are sending a letter to the Ohio OPSB as well as the mayor of Urbana, IL. There is another mistake in the letter when they call one airport private when it is public. I am sure they will correct their goofs. I have attached the original A.O.P.A. that has the mistakes.

 I am reminding all parties about the aviation accident that took place in Champaign County Ohio in March 9, 1967 when a TWA DC-9 en route to Dayton collided with a Beach Baron. The FAA, because of this accident, changed many rules and procedures.  I want the OPSB to understand the hazards of 492ft turbines and face the issue before another tragic accident takes place in Champaign County.

 With  EAA members help the OPSB attention can be directed to this wind turbine issue.

 

 



Files Attachment(s):
AOPA.pdf (178704 bytes)
Rick Rademacher
Vintage Aircraft Association MemberYoung Eagles Pilot or VolunteerAirVenture Volunteer
71
Posts
20
#10 Posted: 10/15/2009 08:51:44

 

Not only do we have two separate aviation museums and an Airport Café on the field, Care Flight has a hanger and operates out of Grimes Field. And they want to put 500ft wind turbines 2-4 miles from Grimes Field.

 

Urbana Care Flight Helicopter Pilot says Urgent Care could be Delayed and Areas Blacked-Out by Wind Turbines

Urbana, Ohio – Bob Herbert, Care Flight Pilot for Air Methods, contracted by Mercy Health Systems granted an interview with his thoughts on the effect of wind turbines and their relation to care flight emergency services in Champaign County. “I didn’t know that much about the project until a week or so ago. I thought there would be a few in remote areas of the county. But this many, wow!” When asked how it would affect care flight operations in the county, Bob said he has FAA requirements and additional A021 ops specs (operations specifications) that his company requires.

“There are certain minimums we have to maintain and must stay out of the clouds, and above the tallest object in the area and we also have to remain 500 feet below any cloud ceiling. Raising the obstruction minimum in an area restricts flights that can be made to deliver critical care. There will be many blocks of airspace near the turbines that will be shut down for care flight service”, says Herbert. “I once flew near a wind farm near Morgantown, West Virginia, but there is no need for medical flights there as the turbines are not located near people.” It was discussed that FAA regulation minimums, Section 135.203 state flight operations must remain 500 foot below the clouds and 500 foot from the nearest obstruction. At night, those restrictions are even higher with 1000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal distance of 5 miles. Bob noted that those are minimums and visibility conditions and company requirements only add to the minimums required by the FAA.

Of greatest concern were night operations. “How do I determine a turbine from a tower”, says Herbert.  “Towers are lit at the top and don’t move or create turbulence; turbines are lit 100 feet or more below the actual top and have rotating blades that cannot be seen in a wide area. We are a 12-hour a day minimum facility with many 24 hour days, often with flights in the dark. With too many altitude restrictions and too many in a small area, where do you go?” says Herbert.

“Bottom line”, says Bob, “helicopter operations in Champaign County will be limited and this could delay critical care needed in assisting victims of accidents to level 1 trauma centers in Dayton and Columbus.” 

Currently there are 70 turbines planned in phase one, with potentially 300-400 total when subsequent projected phases are completed.

Special to the Citizen: interview conducted October 14, 2009 by Nino Vitale, private, instrument rated pilot.

 

 

 



Jesse Schoolcraft
83
Posts
20
#11 Posted: 10/18/2009 14:20:17

I heard something on the news the other day about an Indian tribe filing a notion against the construction of the turbines because they were to be constructed on an Indian mound...?



"Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--- Leonardo da Vinci
Rick Rademacher
Vintage Aircraft Association MemberYoung Eagles Pilot or VolunteerAirVenture Volunteer
71
Posts
20
#12 Posted: 10/18/2009 19:41:23

From the Urbana Daily Citizen on Oct. 12th 09

"  Gene Part, a Springfield resident who is an elder of the Piqua Shawnee Tribe headquartered in Alabama, filed a petition on behalf of the tribe, noting that turbine construction could threaten an ancient Native American burial mound located on private property north of U.S. Route 36, behind Koenig Equipment.

"We're not against turbines, but we are against destroying mounds," Park said Sunday."We just want to protect the mound. It's almost in the footprint of the area where a large group of turbines are to be constructed""

 

Many times I have flown low in my Cub around this mound telling my passenger that it was a glacial moraine. Guess I will now have to change my story on the mound for the few flights left before the turbines are build.

Yes, this group of turbines is the closest to Grimes Field. I too would not like them build there only for a different reason.

 

 



Rich Dugger
15
Posts
3
#13 Posted: 10/19/2009 22:32:54

The best way to stop this is by getting your zoning board involved.

If they don't get a building permit then that is the best way to stop a tower like this.

 

Get the local zoning board involved!!

Locally we have an ordinance that anything near the airport doesn't happen if the airport authority doesn't authorize the zoning board to allow it.

Rich



Rick Rademacher
Vintage Aircraft Association MemberYoung Eagles Pilot or VolunteerAirVenture Volunteer
71
Posts
20
#14 Posted: 10/20/2009 08:03:09

 

In Ohio, wind turbines are exempt from local zoning regulations. The Ohio Power Siting Board has the responsibility for issuing all building permits for wind turbines. Champaign County is the first case in Ohio for this board to act.

 

The rules of the game for all of Ohio will soon be decided.  All airports in Ohio may soon have 492ft wind turbines build close to the runways. What fun!

 

 



Rick Rademacher
Vintage Aircraft Association MemberYoung Eagles Pilot or VolunteerAirVenture Volunteer
71
Posts
20
#15 Posted: 10/23/2009 10:10:17

A.O.P.A has a good brief on the fight. And it is a fight for all Ohio pilots!

http://www.aopa.org/advocacy/articles/2009/091022turbine.html?WT.mc_id=091023epilot&WT.mc_sect=gan

Turbine project would obstruct approach to Ohio airport

A proposed wind farm within two miles of two public-use Ohio airports would pose a hazard for inbound pilots, AOPA told the Ohio Power Siting Board Oct. 13. The Ohio state aviation office also has advised the Ohio Siting Board against allowing this project to proceed. The board will review the proposal in a public hearing Oct. 28.

 

The FAA ruled in September that 38 of the 70 turbines in the proposed Buckeye Wind project near Grimes Field Airport and Weller Airport in Urbana, Ohio, would have an adverse effect upon navigable airspace or air navigation facilities. AOPA Airport Support Network volunteer Nino Vitale has been working with AOPA and his state and local officials to oppose this project, which would obstruct an instrument approach and leave pilots with fewer landing options in bad weather.

“By placing obstructions so close to airports, the Buckeye Wind project would raise an instrument approach 300 feet and introduce a hazard to the airspace,” said AOPA Airport Support Network Director Jesse Romo. “While AOPA appreciates the need to develop alternative energy sources, we believe it is important to ensure that any new construction near airports does not come at the expense of safety.”

The Ohio Siting Board will make final determination on whether the turbines can be erected. Romo told the siting board in a letter that the turbines would raise the minimums of the VOR-A approach into Grimes Field, eliminating or significantly degrading the usefulness of the approach. The proposed turbines would leave pilots with no option but to divert to an alternate airport in bad weather, Romo wrote.

The Buckeye Wind turbines also would affect the nearby privately owned, public-use airport Weller and another privately owned airport. “The construction of so many obstructions in such a confined area would adversely affect the safety of the navigable airspace and may cause the closure of one or more airports,” Romo continued.

Romo recommended that the Ohio Siting Board consider the impacts of the proposed project on flight operations before it issues a final determination and urged the board to deny the application because of the hazards the project would present.

 



Tony Scholes
15
Posts
6
#16 Posted: 10/23/2009 13:09:37

Thanks for keeping us updated on this issue.  This is not just a local or an Ohio issue, it's something that all pilots nationwide need to pay attention to.



Rick Rademacher
Vintage Aircraft Association MemberYoung Eagles Pilot or VolunteerAirVenture Volunteer
71
Posts
20
#17 Posted: 11/3/2009 13:59:47

 

Friends of Ohio Aviation,

 

As you may or may not know, Grimes Field, in Champaign County, home of MERFI, The Hot Air Balloon festival and competition, The Grimes Flying Lab, World War II Museum, B-17 restoration project and many other great historical aviation concerns, is being threatened by the potential installation of  70, 492 foot wind turbines with blade diameters the size of a football field that move at 160 mph.. This is taller than any building in Dayton, 1 building in Cinci is 8 feet taller, nothing in Toledo is this tall and only 4 buildings in Columbus are this tall.

 

You can go to the link below to learn more about this project, see maps, pictures, etc.

 

http://files.jwp-inc.com/Wind%20Turbines/Maps%20and%20CC%20pictures/

 

You can also go to the link below to learn the exact turbines and distances from Grimes Field.

 

http://files.jwp-inc.com/Wind%20Turbines/presumed%20hazards/presumed%20hazards/

 

Click on the excel file.

 

There is much more information at this file sharing site if you are interested.

 

The FAA has issued presumed hazards on 38 of these turbines, however, the turbines companies are lobbying the FAA and the state of Ohio hard to allow these to be built. The FAA also has no jurisdiction to deny construction and if the turbines get built, they start stripping the airport of approaches or other items necessary.  The AOPA has gotten involved and you may have already seen articles on their web site about this, plus their letter to the state of Ohio with regards to Grimes Field.

 

This is not just an issue that is going to affect Grimes Field but there are currently 7 other projects slated for the state, with regard to wind turbines. Many of these project look to install 200-400 turbines in each county.

 

Yes, there is a need for renewable energy sources, however, there is a need for aviation as well, and safe entry in and out of airports.

 

Champaign County is faced with loosing one airport and loosing an instrument approach at another.

 

Additionally, there will be over 13 turbines inside of 3 miles of Grimes field, only 300 feet above pattern altitude.


Never in the history of aviation has such a large MOVING object been built so close to an airfield, with so numerous obstructions. And the FAA part 77 obstruction rules were written in 1971, well before anyone could have conceived these turbines.

 

This is not an issue you can vote on, but by Ohio Law, you do have the ability to influence the process.

 

The Ohio Power Siting Board is the ultimate authority in determining, on a case by case basis, where each turbine is placed and if the building permit is issued.

 

After 7 weeks and hundreds of hours of research, reading, talking with the FAA, talking with the state of Ohio, pilots in Champaign County feel this is not only an issue for Grimes but for all Ohio airports.

 

There is $29 billion in your federal money subsidizing this industry and jeopardizing our local airspace, including where Care Flight can land and medivac patients out.

 

If you feel compelled to write, and fax or mail, the information is below. There is no way to email a letter into the OPSB at this time. Only fax or mail.

 

If you have further questions, go to your favorite search engine and type in wind turbines and aviation. Or just wind turbines. You will find many interesting pieces of information.

 

Yes, your voice counts. So much so, it will be posted on the OPSB web site as many other letters have been. This week is the close of all letters (Friday, November 6th) (3 more days)

 

Thank you for your time.

 

Nino Vitale

Instrument multi-engine private pilot

Grimes Field, Urbana Ohio.

 

Fax your letter to 614-752-8363

 

Here’s the text for you to cut and paste.

 

Insert Date

 

Buckeye Wind Project-Case No.: 08-0666-EL-BGN

Ohio Power Siting Board

180 East Broad Street

Columbus, OH 43215

 

Ohio Power Siting Board,

 

Please insert your own words here. We are not going to tell you what to write. We want you to discern the project impact on Champaign County and aviation for Ohio and possibly the country.

 

Thank you for being an informed and concerned aviation citizen and please forward.

 

Cordially,

 

(signature)

 

First Name, Last Name

123 Anywhere Road

City, State zip

(phone if you wish)

 

Here is the list of 38 FAA hazardous turbines and their distance from Grimes Field.

 

Turbine

 

https://www.oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/images/icons/asc.gifCase Number

 

 

 

Feet

NM from

FAR

FAR

FAR

 

 

 

 

 

 

Numbers

 

Airspace

Approach

Approach

above

airport

Violation

Violation

Violation

 

 

 

 

 

 

17

1

2009-WTE-3823-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

218

3.82

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

29

2

2009-WTE-3825-OE

2 FARs

VOR-A

 

292

2.38

77.23 (a)(2)

77.25 (b)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

24

3

2009-WTE-3830-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

292

2.48

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

26

4

2009-WTE-3832-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

GPS 20

292

2.6

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

27

5

2009-WTE-3833-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

292

2.97

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

28

6

2009-WTE-3834-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

12

5.85

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

29

7

2009-WTE-3835-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

GPS 20

292

2.33

77.23 (a)(2)

77.25 (b)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

30

8

2009-WTE-3836-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

GPS 20

292

2.71

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

31

9

2009-WTE-3837-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

282

3.14

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

32

10

2009-WTE-3838-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

126

4.7

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

33

11

2009-WTE-3839-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

9

5.87

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

34

12

2009-WTE-3840-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

GPS 20

292

2.45

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

35

13

2009-WTE-3841-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

292

2.85

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

36

14

2009-WTE-3842-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

265

3.3

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

37

15

2009-WTE-3843-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

163

4.33

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

38

16

2009-WTE-3844-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

GPS 20

292

2.57

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

39

17

2009-WTE-3845-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

126

4.7

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

40

18

2009-WTE-3846-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

292

2.98

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

41

19

2009-WTE-3847-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

156

4.39

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

42

20

2009-WTE-3848-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

292

2.7

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

43

21

2009-WTE-3849-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

277

3.16

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

44

22

2009-WTE-3850-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

124

4.71

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

45

23

2009-WTE-3851-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

292

2.83

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

46

24

2009-WTE-3852-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

292

2.93

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

Weller is 77.25 161 feet above - Conical

 

 

47

25

2009-WTE-3853-OE

 

VOR-A

 

 

6.13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

48

26

2009-WTE-3854-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

121

4.72

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

Weller is 77.25 312 feet above - Conical

 

 

49

27

2009-WTE-3855-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

63

5.3

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

50

28

2009-WTE-3856-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

139

4.54

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

Weller is 77.25 (a) 340 feet above .77 nm - Horizontal

52

29

2009-WTE-3858-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

35

5.57

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

55

30

2009-WTE-3861-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

20

5.72

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

57

31

2009-WTE-3863-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

153

4.4

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

Weller is 77.25(a) 340 feet above .67 nm - Horizontal

58

32

2009-WTE-3864-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

108

4.84

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

Weller is 77.25 303 feet above .99 nm - Conical

 

60

33

2009-WTE-3866-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

99

4.93

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

Weller is 77.25 252 feet above 1.1 nm - Conical

 

61

34

2009-WTE-3867-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

89

5.03

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

Weller is 77.25 208 feet above 1.23 nm - Conical

 

62

35

2009-WTE-3868-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

174

4.19

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

Weller is 77.25 218 feet above 1.35 nm - Conical

 

63

36

2009-WTE-3869-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

157

4.36

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

Weller is 77.25 175 feet above 1.43 nm - Conical

 

66

37

2009-WTE-3872-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

139

4.54

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

Mad River is 77.23 18 feet above 5.75 nm

 

 

68

38

2009-WTE-3874-OE

1 FAR

VOR-A

 

80

5.13

77.23 (a)(2)

 

 

Mad River is 77.23 28 feet above 5.65 nm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Rick Rademacher
Vintage Aircraft Association MemberYoung Eagles Pilot or VolunteerAirVenture Volunteer
71
Posts
20
#18 Posted: 11/12/2009 15:32:27

 

The following are excerpts from the Urbana Daily Citizen on Wednesday, November 12, 2009 on the wind turbine issue and testimony before the Ohio Power Sitting Board.

 

“Thaddeus Brys, of Torrance, Calif, continued testimony Tuesday related to a topic Shears mentioned Monday, specifically the Federal Aviation Administration’s notices of presumed hazard for parts of the project.

In September, the FAA issued notices of presumed hazard for 38 of the 70 proposed turbine sites. Brys, as Shears did Monday, claimed that the number has been reduced to 16.”The FAA  on Sunday amended 22 of them that are now determinations of no hazard,” Brys said”

“You understand there’s an airport that’s affected that’s owned by the city of Urbana,” Weithman said.”How many times have you been to Grimes Field?”

“Never,” Brys said,”Ive seen pictures of it”

 

Brys, who retired as an air traffic controller in 2005 and now is a private consultant with Aviation Systems, and said he specializes in “air-space analysis”now.

…..

He said although one of his recommendations involved “privatization” of both airports so that the FAA restrictions would not apply to construction, Grimes Field’s receipt of federal funding for airport improvements would preclude that for a number of years.

….

Attorney Cris Walker for Union Neighbors United zeroed in on how Brys used his inside connections with the FAA to overturn the notices of hazard

“Even if it’s technical, I’m interested I hearing about what they thought you had misapplied,” Walker said.

“I basically bugged them,” Brys said,”I talked to people who weren’t in charge but knew about approaches. I was able to more up the chain but it took a few weeks. I asked them to review 35 only as it pertains to VOR –Alpha procedures.”

“With regard to the determinations that were reversed, can you help me understand the reason for the reversal?” Walker asked.

“The FAA misapplied the criteria for VOR-A… fixed displacement, a margin of error applied for navigational aid inaccuracies”, Brys said”

 

 

This Saturday, I am leaving with my wife  for a week in Florida. I may have to cut this vacation short because I am also going to testify on behalf of the airport one day that same week. Ever the way!

 

However, I will do what ever it takes to keep the slogan on the Ohio tags from changing for the “Birthplace of Aviation” to the “Graveyard of Aviation”!!!!!

 

 



Gregory Lawrence
Young Eagles Pilot or Volunteer
31
Posts
12
#19 Posted: 11/16/2009 07:15:16
Rick Rademacher wrote:

 I am reminding all parties about the aviation accident that took place in Champaign County Ohio in March 9, 1967 when a TWA DC-9 en route to Dayton collided with a Beach Baron. The FAA, because of this accident, changed many rules and procedures.  I want the OPSB to understand the hazards of 492ft turbines and face the issue before another tragic accident takes place in Champaign County.

  

In 1967 we didn't have Class Bravo airspace driving VFR traffic below the outer layers.  We did have and still have lots of restricted and prohibited air space because of military operations that compress VFR traffic.  I was a line boy for Reliable Aviation at DAY and Al Butterfield asked me to get a helicopter out of the hangar and ready to go.  He asked me if I wanted to ride along and of course I accepted.  I spent the next 12 hours or so picking pieces of people out of trees.  That experience is etched in my mind and still wakes me up sometimes at night.  Now your are putting 500 foot Cuisinarts everywhere to force the traffic up into the IFR MDAs or chop them up better.

 

 



Deafhawk
John McGinnis
Young Eagles Pilot or VolunteerHomebuilder or CraftsmanAirVenture Volunteer
201
Posts
109
#20 Posted: 11/19/2009 01:48:38

As a designer of aircraft and fluid dynamic objects, I'd submit that there is no reason whatsoever for the existence of 492 ft tall wind turbines. 85% of their generated energy is lost to the utility distribution grid, and their aerodynamic efficiency is pathetic. A dynasty of the status quo has been created in support of this model, while the infinitely superior idea for low voltage local generation isn't even considered by top scientists whose funding depends on tacit endorsement.

The wind is a distributed resource that can be locally tapped at triple the aerodynamic efficiency, transformed into electrical energy at double the mechanical efficiency, and utilized at six times the electrical efficiency. From this must be subtracted the large difference in wind speed nearer the ground and the advantage of diameter, yet every farmer once knew how even a crude solution was a critical resource for the low-impact home.

I'd much rather demonstrate this than talk about it, so anyone planning to make a difference through wind technology is invited to contact me.



1  2  Next Page >